Attorney General Eric Holder states no, Constitution allow a US citizen on US soil to be killed by a drone?, No imminent and immediate threat of death and bodily harm

Attorney General Eric Holder states no, Constitution allow a US citizen on US soil to be killed by a drone?, No imminent and immediate threat of death and bodily harm

“In the Department’s view, a lethal operation conducted against a U.S. citizen whose conduct poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States would be a legitimate act of national self-defense that would not violate the assassination ban. Similarly, the use of lethal force, consistent with the laws of war, against an individual who is a legitimate military target would be lawful and would not violate the assassination ban.”…Obama DOJ Memo

“I just want you to know that we are working on it (gun control)….We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”…Barack Obama

“Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples’ liberty’s teeth.”…George Washington

From Mediaite March 6, 2013.

“Ted Cruz Goads Eric Holder Into Admitting That Killing Americans With Drones On U.S. Soil Is Unconstitutional”

“On Tuesday, the Department of Justice sent shockwaves through the nation when Attorney General Eric Holder informed Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) in writing that the White House would be within its legal authority to execute an American citizen via drone on U.S. soil if that person was determined to pose a threat to national security. On Wednesday, testifying before a Senate panel, Holder was prodded repeatedly about this assertion by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX). Holder eventually admitted that it would not be constitutional to execute an American citizen without due process.

“In your legal judgment, does the Constitution allow a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil to be killed by a drone?” Cruz asked Holder pointedly.

“For sitting in a café and having a cup of coffee?” Holder replied. Cruz clarified that his hypothetical individual subject to a drone strike did not pose an “imminent and immediate threat of death and bodily harm,” but that person is suspected to be a terrorist.

“I would not think that that would be an appropriate use of any kind of lethal force,” Holder replied.”

54 responses to “Attorney General Eric Holder states no, Constitution allow a US citizen on US soil to be killed by a drone?, No imminent and immediate threat of death and bodily harm”

Submitted on 2013/03/06 at 3:02 pm
“Rand Paul is now into his fourth hour of filibustering Brennan nomination. He’s trying to get people alerted to the drone question and get real answers from this regime. He’s just mentioned 1984, reading it years ago and seeing a lot of those examples happening today. The real question I think is asking when and where the pResident declared, via congress, war on America. No one asks or demands that. He’s citing all kinds of cases of unenumerated rights.

He’s giving all kinds of examples where drones are now beginning to observe almost every aspect of our lives….the privacy question re: open spaces.

Interesting to watch….of course if he were a lib dem he’d be less reasoning and using more shouting with emotional tactics.

Emphasizing rights of natural freedoms given by God and enshrined….not given by gov. Sen. Lee now being offered time to offer some more facts….about the sanctity of human life. Connecting the “snuffing out of human life with a drone” to the ease of abortion….the cheapening of human life and taking away the freedoms from those decided to be “threats” for any reason. Yes, most interesting for a change…even if one feels the argument not being made strongly enough. Discussing what is meant by “imminent” danger as basis for killing by drones.”

I would like them to include the psychological effect on Americans of these ongoing threats by this regime. Americans are being effected spiritually and psychologically…iow, they are scared of their government now. As Dr. Carson has said…people are feeling scared about speaking up as is their freedom. We are being terrorized from within….now to the unbelievable possibility of being innocent collateral damage of a drone strike as if the war has been so expanded, without limits, to even include our own neighborhoods. Force the pResident/congress to declare war on America because that is what this amounts to.

Unfortunately now idiot dem Wyden is defending Brennan. I tried to get through to the Wash. D.C. number….couldn’t/busy….but called one of Cruz’s district offices and gave the lady my concerns about hopefully including in the filibuster the real fear that is growing in America by her own citizens, of their government….that this feeling of fear/terror being generated by this regime is frightening….and that neither this pResident nor congress has declared war upon America in order to target with such weapons of war, etc. Perhaps it’s a good sign that the DC # is busy!

OLD DUCK AND DODGE DURBI from Obamas homestate and a bleeding heart liberal….. just objected to a non binding resolution by Paul for a vote on the floor of the Senate tomorrow concerning the right of Obama to kill non combatant citizens within the boundries of the United States…..

Clearly, the democrats think Obama should be given unlimited powers to kill American citizens whenever and wherever he wants………Kings and Emporors don’t even claim this right……..

Part of the significance of Sen. Paul’s filibuster is that all of it will become part of the Congressional Record for posterity. No one will be able to say that we weren’t informed of the gravity of these Constitutional issues.

Since attacking Americans in Benghazi….on what is considered American soil….is an act of war, why isn’t attacking Americans (in this case by their own government) on their own soil also considered an act of war? So if this policy is still adopted by this pResident why not grounds for impeachment or arrest?

“Ann S: At approx 4:15 EST Hannity (radio) interviews Ted Cruz. At the end of the conversation Hannity asks Cruz if he is eligible to run for POTUS. Cruz dodges the question, but Hannity pushes. Cruz says his focus is on our country’s problems and he’ll leave it to others to decide if he’s NBC. When Hannity keeps it going Cruz says he was born of an American mother avoiding place of birth. Hannity brings up the Canadian birth. Cruz says he had American citizenship at birth because of his mother. Hannity concludes something like “well then your’e NBC!” – Hat tip Ann S.”

“Claiming that “America is hemorrhaging” and headed rapidly toward death, media giant Glenn Beck says he’s lost faith in many of the institutions that have made the U.S. such a great country, and it’s time to “surrender.”
…
“I’ve lost faith in my government, I’ve lost faith in the media, in banking, the justice system, some of our big-city police departments … I think I just didn’t have faith in the DMV 15 years ago. Now I question everything. I don’t have faith in any of it.””

Rand Paul is doing a great service to this country right now. I only wish all the repubs would file into that chamber and support him. Thank you Senator Paul. The teleprompter in chief could never talk this long without electronic help and even then he doesn’t make much sense.

It is good to see old fashioned government working for a change like it should–in front of the American people.

I agree wholeheartedly!! I’ve been watching for about six hours already and learning much, too. This is a much needed Republican-held, frank discussion that is encompassing broad constitutional issues involved, and it is historical, imho.

It’s been over twelve hours now and I’m determined to filibuster right along with Rand. Oh yeah, I forgot to tell everyone at CW’s that Jack A$$ Politics and Culture came out in paperback a couple of days ago. It’s available at Amazon right now. Don’t know when it will be on the store shelves.

Back to Rand: It’s like The Devil and Daniel Webster. The country has sold its soul to the devil incarnate at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Rand Paul is arguing to win it back. God smiled on us when he gave us Rand Paul. I’m praying while I’m listening.

Does everyone recall that John Brennan is at the very least pro-Muslim and possibly a convert to Islam? Of course Obama would like someone like himself heading up the CIA and willing to use drones on Americans.

Bob Strauss………..
Have you ever listened to Alan Colmes talk? He is one of the most UNINFORMED LIBERAL MORONS that I have ever heard. He even tries to say that things that have already been proven as BULLSHI# are true. I seriously believe that Colmes is a complete idiot, and might have some amorous tendencies towards Soetoro.

If you are fortunate enough to live through an attack from a drone you are legally justified in most states to fire upon anyone,or anything that is attacking you with a lethal weapon. If the attack is from a drone then you will probably need a .50 cal.M-82 Barrets rifle. Then hopefully you will be proficient at shooting at moving targets. While I am not aware of the airspeed of drones,I would still advise to lead the target in the direction it is flying by approx 1 length of it’s fueslage. If it is flying at a higher airspeed you will need greater lead.

Well, since the country is pretty adept at picking losers of late this shouldn’t come as a surprise!….that is, if there is any country left in 2016. All we need is another “leader” who enjoys leaving Americans to die or plans to drone them at home.

Press Release 14 U.S. Congressman and House Judiciary committee were served with subpoenas with attached Urgent Demand for Verification to be provided within 2 weeks by March 19th. If they do not comply, they are in contempt of court.